IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v24y2019i1p3-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizing Health Inequalities? Employee-Driven Innovation and the Transformation of Care

Author

Listed:
  • Susan Halford

    (University of Southampton, UK)

  • Alison Fuller

    (University College London, UK)

  • Kate Lyle

    (University of Southampton, UK)

  • Rebecca Taylor

    (University of Southampton, UK)

Abstract

This article responds to calls for new approaches to understanding and intervening in health inequalities and, in particular, for attention to the processes and relations that mediate structural inequality and everyday outcomes. Our contribution focuses on the part that healthcare organizations play in this. We draw on organizational sociology, which theorizes that while organizational structures, cultures, and practices may appear neutral – and rely for their legitimacy on this – they may, in fact, operate in the interests of some social groups and less in the interests of others. This proposition is worked through new empirical research on employee-driven innovation in the UK National Health Service. In both our case studies, front-line staff working with some of the most vulnerable citizens had identified the organization of care as both part of the problem and – potentially – part of the solution. In tracing their efforts to change the organization of care, we learn more about what it might take to mobilize resources in support of those whose lives are most affected by health inequalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan Halford & Alison Fuller & Kate Lyle & Rebecca Taylor, 2019. "Organizing Health Inequalities? Employee-Driven Innovation and the Transformation of Care," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 24(1), pages 3-20, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:24:y:2019:i:1:p:3-20
    DOI: 10.1177/1360780418790272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1360780418790272
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1360780418790272?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bowling, Ann & Jacobson, Bobbie & Southgate, Lesley, 1993. "Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals on priority setting in an inner London health district," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 851-857, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alan Felstead & Duncan Gallie & Francis Green & Golo Henseke, 2020. "Getting the Measure of Employee‐Driven Innovation and Its Workplace Correlates," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(4), pages 904-935, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Broqvist, Mari & Garpenby, Peter, 2015. "It takes a giraffe to see the big picture – Citizens' view on decision makers in health care rationing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 301-308.
    2. Gold, Marthe Rachel & Franks, Peter & Siegelberg, Taryn & Sofaer, Shoshanna, 2007. "Does providing cost-effectiveness information change coverage priorities for citizens acting as social decision makers?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 65-72, September.
    3. Joanna Coast, 2001. "Citizens, their agents and health care rationing: an exploratory study using qualitative methods," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(2), pages 159-174, March.
    4. Jennifer Whitty & Sharyn Rundle-Thiele & Paul Scuffham, 2012. "Insights from triangulation of two purchase choice elicitation methods to predict social decision making in healthcare," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 113-126, March.
    5. Anabela Botelho & Micaela M. Pinho & Paula Veiga, 2011. "Who and how should participate in health care priority setting? Evidence from a Portuguese survey," NIMA Working Papers 43, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
    6. Rosen, Per, 2006. "Public dialogue on healthcare prioritisation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 107-116, November.
    7. Mossialos, Elias & King, Derek, 1999. "Citizens and rationing: analysis of a European survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 75-135, September.
    8. L. Sampietro-Colom & M. Espallargues & E. Rodríguez & M. Comas & J. Alonso & X. Castells & J.L. Pinto, 2008. "Wide Social Participation in Prioritizing Patients on Waiting Lists for Joint Replacement: A Conjoint Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(4), pages 554-566, July.
    9. Menon, Devidas & Stafinski, Tania & Martin, Douglas, 2007. "Priority-setting for healthcare: Who, how, and is it fair?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(2-3), pages 220-233, December.
    10. Soderlund, Neil, 1998. "Possible objectives and resulting entitlements of essential health care packages," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 195-208, September.
    11. Abelson, Julia & Eyles, John & McLeod, Christopher B. & Collins, Patricia & McMullan, Colin & Forest, Pierre-Gerlier, 2003. "Does deliberation make a difference? Results from a citizens panel study of health goals priority setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 95-106, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:24:y:2019:i:1:p:3-20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.